Hindsight 2020? Assessing consumer-modified dining decision making

What the paper says

Purpose This study assesses individual coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experience and consumer dining decisions after the recent pandemic. Based on those experiences, what are they likely to choose in the case of another pandemic between dine-in, pick-up and delivery options. In assessing behavior, age and personality are examined to determine influence on future likelihood for modified dining. The purpose of the current study is to assess consumer response and the influence that hindsight plays in informing future purchase intention. Design/methodology/approach To achieve the study objectives, a self-administered survey questionnaire was developed based on the findings of the literature review. The survey consisted of five parts covering the following issues: (1) screening, (2) personality form questions, (3) restaurant current dining experiences, (4) dining future likelihood and (5) demographics. The survey was distributed through Prolific. After the data wascleaned, 240 viable responses remained and were used for analysis. Findings Key findings build a foundation for recommendations for consumer behavior in crisis management, as well as marketing to the varying consumer groups. The current study is a first empirical look at Yost and Cheng’s (2021) conceptualization of the rational versus emotional dining decision-making post-pandemic. With the hypothesis of personal COVID-19 experience accepted (with pick-up, the socially distanced option) and personality as an influence not being accepted, it appears in relation to dining options, the choice is rational decision-making. Originality/value The pandemic and COVID-19 have been widely studied from many contexts. The goal of this study was to extend to a forward-thinking approach on how coping mechanisms learned during the last experience may help in future experiences. The study brought empirical findings from studies reviewing cognitive decision making in crisis.